If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

A stun gun apparently was used on a woman at a New Tampa Walmart on New Year's Day, and police are investigating whether she was the victim of a hate crime.

The victim, a Muslim who was wearing a traditional ethnic dress known as a salwar (kameez), told investigators she was hit by a stun gun fired by another shopper shortly before 9 p.m. Sunday at the store at 19910 Bruce B. Downs Blvd., Tampa police spokeswoman Laura McElroy said.

A video of the incident does not show the victim being hit by the stun gun, said McElroy. But she did have marks "consistent" with being hit by a stun gun, McElroy said.

"She has two marks on her back," McElroy said. "We have no reason to doubt what she is saying."

The video shows the suspect and another woman following the victim through the store as if she were being targeted, McElroy said. The video does not show an exchange between the women, the stun gun incident or the victim being hit, but that may have occurred off-camera, said McElroy.

Before police can determine if the incident rises to the level of a hate crime, they must first find the suspect, described as a heavy-set white female, about 5 feet, 6 inches tall and between ages 30 and 49, said McElroy.

Investigators, she said, will have to determine if the offense "was based on prejudice against victim's race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation."

McElroy said the victim's daughters raised the issue of whether she was being targeted because of her religion.

Another possibility, said McElroy, is that the victim may have been targeted because of the big purse she had in her shopping cart.

Efforts to reach the victim by phone were not immediately successful.

Hassan Shibly, spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, said, "If indeed this was a hate crime it is a clear sign that anti-Muslim rhetoric is not cost free and may unfortunately lead to senseless attacks against law abiding American Muslims."

Shibly said via email that regardless of the motive, he hopes the suspect is caught.

FLORDIA ANTI-ISLAM POLITICAN AND GROUP PUSHING TO PASS ANTI-SHARIA LAW

Can you believe these Tallahassee lawmakers? Last week we rallied hundreds of supporters to the State Capitol in Tallahassee to oppose the "anti-foreign law" bill or SB1360. On the same day, a Senate Subcommittee was meeting to discuss and vote on the proposed law. To our shock, the committee, denied our delegates the right to speak.

They're so arrogant, they didn’t even bother to listen to what we had to say about this bill that, if passed, will take away our religious freedom. They actually spent more time laughing at themselves trying to pronounce our names than focusing on hearing why we don’t want this bill to pass. Without discussion, debate or input, the committee took less than a minute to vote and pass the bill. Just watch the video below to see for yourself.

The Florida House version of the bill has already passed, the Senate version or SB1360 will go to a floor vote this week, UNLESS YOU URGE YOUR SENATOR TO OPPOSE IT, click here to act.

Please join me and other supporters that are fighting to uphold the Constitution and defend our communities. Now’s our time to show these lawmakers that we're hundreds of thousands strong state-wide and we WILL use our collective resources to see that this bill never sees the light of day. Let's remind them that they took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not violate it. Let's advise them that SB1360 was never intended to protect American law from the threats of "foreign" (shariah) law, this bill is intended to marginalize and target the Muslim community.

WE NEED YOUR HELP! If you are living in Florida, MAKE SURE YOU CLICK HERE TO SEND A LETTER TO YOUR SENATOR URGING THEM TO OPPOSE SB1360. It takes LESS THAN 30 SECONDS to sign the letter, which will also include a complaint to the Senate President about the despicable behavior and misconduct shown by Senate subcommittee members to the Muslims that opposed the bill at that meeting. It is equally important to CALL YOUR FLORIDA STATE SENATOR ON MONDAY and make your voice heard.

NOW IS THE TIME! WE CANNOT AFFORD TO SIT BY AND BE HOPEFUL. YOUR INACTION COULD COST OTHER MUSLIMS AND MINORITIES THEIR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM!

EVEN IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE FLORIDA, we urge you to send a quick note to the Florida Senate President and Chair of the Budget Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice, expressing your concern about the misconduct of the senators who refused our right against SB1360. CLICK HERE TO SEND THEM AN EMAIL, It takes less than 30 seconds.

Regardless of where you live, we need your financial support to continue this political fight. CAN YOU MAKE A DONATION OF $50, $100 or $250 in order to mobilize more people, grow this campaign and defeat this law in Florida?

Finally, to have a real fighting chance, we need more people to get involved, speak out, send emails and make phone calls. Please help us secure 25 signatures by forwarding this email to all your friends and relatives urging them to also send letters and take action via our new designated campaign page http://stopsb1360.org.

I just watched the video in her email, and I find it disturbing that these lawmakers feel comfortable denying our community members the right to speak at a public meeting about a law that will impact Muslim Americans more than anyone else.
The Senate will vote on this bill any day now and unless they hear from you, this proposed bill will become the law.
Thank you for your help.
Salaam

Manal

P.S. Please forward this email to your friends and ask them to also sign their own letters.

A few hours ago, the Florida Senate proved they're more interested in pushing their agenda instead of hearing or representing the people. Sorry for flooding you with emails, but this matter is so urgent.

MORE SHADY BUSINESS FROM THE STATE SENATE
Realizing that opposition to the bill was rapidly growing, the Senate President just YANKED SB 1360 from the budget committee and placed it on the Senate Floor calendar for a 2nd reading and vote. These guys are doing everything to try to RUSH THIS BILL through before we reach our full momentum. Their action is definitely suspicious and is evidence that they're scared to debate the merits of this legislation.

Last week a Florida Senate subcommittee rammed the anti-Foreign Bill 1360 (which is really intended to target the Muslim community) at a public meeting, while denying dozens of witnesses the right to speak against it. The next stop for the bill was the Budget Committee, where we hoped to mobilize more opposition in order to stop this reckless runaway train. Knowing that the Budget Committee meeting would have given us another opportunity to speak against the bill, the Senate decided to skip this step all together.

THE STAKES JUST GOT HIGHER, THE SENATE WILL NOW VOTE ON THIS BILL IN A MATTER OF HOURS

We are now facing a time-crunch. The State Senate will not announce when this bill will hit the floor for debate. It's clear they don't want any opposition, it's clear they don't like our voice, it's clear they know the bill is problematic. We need to move quickly and double our efforts to send more emails and make the phone calls necessary to stop SB1360.

P.S. Please forward this email to your friends and ask them to also sign their own letters.
-

I'm shocked, I'm speechless, I'm upset and I've just had enough.

I've had enough of the madness coming out of Tallahassee. I've had enough of their dirty politics. But all that could not have prepared us for what just happened in the Florida Senate. As Senators get ready to debate and vote on SB1360, the Senate is swamped with anti-Islam hate-filled booklets, flyers and posters.

We've been sounding the alarms, mobilizing, rallying and lobbying people in Florida against SB1360. It's sponsor Senator Alan Hays, has said over and over that the intended purpose of his bill is to protect American and Florida laws from "Foreign" laws. We've repeatedly pointed out that his legislation is a version of David Yerushalmi's model legislation that's designed to target Muslims and Islamic practices.

Now that his legislation, SB1360, has been sent to the Senate floor and will be voted on in the next two days, WHAT DOES SENATOR HAYS DO?

According to the Miami Herald, Senator Hays' office has flooded the Senate with a booklet titled “Shari'ah Law: Radical Islam's threat to the U.S. Constitution.” He said his intent is to educate people on Islam and Sharia Law, a Koran-based code followed in some Islamic countries.

HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH YET? There is more:
But that's not all Florida Senators found in their mailboxes and in hallways today. Accompanying Senator Hays' booklet, are VERY DISTURBING AND HATEFUL posters. One poster urges the reader to "SAVE US FROM THE PERSECUTION OF ISLAM" and claims that "ISLAM.. IS THE ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES" that's "DETERMINED TO OVERTHROW OUR STATE AND COUNTRY."

Our supporters (you) have generated over 10,000 emails to the Florida Senate over the last 2 days. Now we need to generate hundreds of phone calls. Can I count on you to make at least 5 phone calls today?

Below are the names and phone numbers of the The Florida Senate Leadership. Traditionally, lawmakers will follow their party leadership when it comes to voting on issues. If the leadership opposes SB1360, the other Senators will also oppose it. The Democratic leadership has already indicated that they oppose the bill. Which means we need to put pressure on the Republican leadership starting with the Senate President Mike Haridopolos, Senator Bennett, Senator Gardiner and Senator Benacquisto. We've included their phone numbers below.

ACT NOW, DON'T DELAY

1. CALL THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE SENATE, TELL THEM TO OPPOSE SB1360.
2. IF YOU LIVE IN FLORIDA, CALL YOUR STATE SENATOR. CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR SENATOR.
3. TELL WHOEVER ANSWERS THE PHONE THAT YOU WANT THE SENATOR TO OPPOSE AND VOTE NO ON SB1360.
4. IF YOU GET VOICEMAIL, LEAVE A MESSAGE. URGING THEM TO VOTE NO ON SB1360.
5. IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY SENT AN EMAIL TO THE FL SENATE, CLICK HERE TO DO SO NOW.

MAKE IT HAPPEN.

Sincerely,Manal Fakhoury
United Voices
StopSB1360.org

P.S. Regardless of where you live, we need your financial support to continue this political fight. CAN YOU MAKE A DONATION OF $50, $100 or $250 in order to mobilize more people, grow this campaign and defeat this law in Florida?

There is a difference between "Anti foreign laws" and removing religious freedom.

If you say there is no difference then you are playing into the hands of Spencer of the Jihad Watch website.

Spencer says that Muslims cannot see a difference between Sharia Law and religious freedom. The press says he is wrong. The press sees Muslims something like Baptists, go to church on Sunday and practise secular law during the week.

There is a difference between "Anti foreign laws" and removing religious freedom.

If you say there is no difference then you are playing into the hands of Spencer of the Jihad Watch website.

Spencer says that Muslims cannot see a difference between Sharia Law and religious freedom. The press says he is wrong. The press sees Muslims something like Baptists, go to church on Sunday and practise secular law during the week.

Have a nice day!

,

SB 1360: Application of Foreign Law

Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases; Clarifying that the public policies expressed in the act apply to violations of a natural person’s fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges guaranteed by the State Constitution or the United States Constitution; declaring that certain decisions rendered under such laws, codes, or systems are void; providing that the act may not be construed to require or authorize any court to adjudicate, or prohibit any religious organization from adjudicating, ecclesiastical matters in violation of specified constitutional provisions or to conflict with any federal treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is a party to a specified extent, etc.

Religious Freedom CommissionAccused of Anti-Muslim Bias (Wash. Post)The lawsuit, which follows an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint that Ghori-Ahmad filed in 2010, lays blame on several longtime commissioners, including Nina Shea, an attorney and writer who focuses on religious freedom crises abroad, particularly the plight of Christian minorities. The suit quotes Shea as writing that "hiring a Muslim like Ms. Ghori-Ahmad to analyze religious freedom in Pakistan would be like 'hiring an IRA activist to research the UK twenty years ago.'"

Background:Coalition Opposes New Religious Freedom AppointeeA broad national coalition of 64 organizations and individuals today sent a letter to Senators Inouye, McConnell and Durbin expressing "deep concern" at the recent appointment of Zuhdi Jasser to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

It quotes staff as encouraging Safiya Ghori-Ahmad, during her short period working at the commission, to call in sick on the days that particular commissioners were in the office, to “downplay her religious affiliation” and to emphasize that she is a “mainstream and ‘moderate’ Muslim” who doesn’t cover her hair.

The lawsuit, which follows an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint that Ghori-Ahmad filed in 2010, lays blame on several longtime commissioners, including Nina Shea, an attorney and writer who focuses on religious freedom crises abroad, particularly the plight of Christian minorities. The suit quotes Shea as writing that “hiring a Muslim like Ms. Ghori-Ahmad to analyze religious freedom in Pakistan would be like ‘hiring an IRA activist to research the UK twenty years ago.’”

The commission referred questions to the Justice Department, which represents the quasi-governmental organization; Justice officials declined to immediately comment.

Shea and several other commissioners have long been accused of criticizing aspects of the Islamic faith in a way that unfairly stigmatizes all Muslims. Others see Shea and her arguments as a bold challenge to Islamic extremism and terrorism.

The suit quotes the commission’s policy and research director, Knox Thames, as telling Ghori-Ahmad that the offer to be a South Asia policy analyst was retracted — weeks after being made, and after she had quit her other job — because “certain Commissioners objected to her Muslim faith and affiliation ... He said he was sorry this had happened,” the suit says.

Also accused of leading the alleged discrimination was longtime commission chairman Leonard Leo, a key consultant at times to Republican leaders on Catholic issues and executive vice president of the Federalist Society.

Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with youtill you follow their religion. Say: "Verily, the Guidance of Allâh (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism) that is the (only) Guidance.

And if youwere to follow their (Jews and Christians) desires after what you have received of Knowledge (i.e. the Qur'ân), then you would have against Allâh neither any Walî (protector or guardian) nor any helper.

POLICE searched for a woman who killed a man by pushing him in front of a New York City subway train and released surveillance video of her running away from the station.
The man who was shoved to his death was a 46-year-old from India who lived in New York City and worked for a printing business, police said.

Investigators identified the victim, who lived alone in Queens, through a smartphone and a prescription pill bottle he was carrying. They delayed releasing his name while they worked to notify his relatives in India.

Commuters, meanwhile, absorbed the news of the second fatal subway shove in the city this month.

"It's just a really sad commentary on the world and on human beings, period," said Howard Roth, who takes the subway daily...

...On December 3, 58-year-old Queens man Ki-Suck Han was pushed in front of a train in Times Square. Apparently no other passenger tried to help Han...

I pushed a Muslim, says woman who shoved an Indian to death on NY subway tracks

A 31-year-old woman suspected of shoving an Indian immigrant in front of a subway train has been charged with second-degree murder as a hate crime after she told the police that she hated Hindus and Muslims since 9/11. Prosecutors Saturday identified the woman, who allegedly shoved India-born Sunando Sen of Queens, in front of a subway train Thursday as Erika Menendez of Bronx.

"(She) said in sum and substance 'I pushed a Muslim off the train tracks because I hate Hindus and Muslims ever since 2001 when they put down the twin towers. I've been beating them up," Queens District Attorney Richard A Brown said in a statement...

...The woman made "statements implicating herself in the death of Sunando Sen," Paul Browne, the New York Police Department's chief spokesman, said earlier. Security video showed a person running from the scene.

Menendez was identified Saturday afternoon in a lineup, Browne said. She was recognized earlier on a street in Brooklyn by a passerby who called 911, the police spokesman said. The caller said she resembled the woman in the video.

"The defendant is accused of committing what is every subway commuter's worst nightmare-being suddenly and senselessly pushed into the path of an oncoming train," said Brown, the district attorney. "The victim was allegedly shoved from behind and had no chance to defend himself. Beyond that, the hateful remarks allegedly made by the defendant and which precipitated the defendant's actions can never be tolerated by a civilized society."

Menendez is expected to be arraigned by Sunday morning. If convicted, she faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. By charging her with murder as a hate crime, the possible minimum sentence she faced would be extended to 20 years from 15 years, according to prosecutors.

Ar Suman, a Muslim, and one of three roommates who shared a small first-floor apartment with Sen in Elmhurst, told the New York Times that he and Sen often discussed religion. Though they were of different faiths, Suman said, he admired the respect that Sen showed for those who saw the world differently than he did. Suman said he once asked Sen why he was not more active in his faith and it resulted in a long philosophical discussion.

"He was so gentle," Suman was quoted as saying. "He said in this world a lot of people are dying, killing over religious things." Reacting to the suspect woman's statement, the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations repeated its call for America's political and religious leaders to speak out forcefully against growing anti-Muslim hate in American society.

"We again urge our nation's leaders to speak out forcefully against the rising level of anti-Muslim hate in American society that is being fueled and exploited by a vocal minority of Islamophobes," said CAIR-NY Executive Director Muneer Awad.

Sen was pushed to death by a woman who "hated Muslims", as anti-Muslim bigotry in the US sinks to violent new depths.

On the evening of December 27, an Indian immigrant to America named Sunando Sen was pushed by a stranger onto the subway tracks in New York City and struck and killed by an oncoming train. Sen had called New York home for years, and after years of hard work and struggle had recently managed to achieve his lifelong goal of opening a small business of his own, a copy shop in Upper Manhattan.

His roommate, MD Khan expressed shock at the death of his friend, a soft spoken man who liked to stay up late watching comedy shows and listening to music: "He was so nice, gentle and quiet… It's broken my heart."

The following day, the NYPD announced the arrest of Erika Menendez, a 31-year-old woman who had been spotted on security footage fleeing the scene after Sen had been pushed. Upon being detained and taken to a 112th Precinct police station for questioning, Menendez confessed to Sen's murder and revealed as her motivation a desire to commit violence against Muslims. As she told detectives:

"I pushed a Muslim off the train tracks because I hate Hindus and Muslims… Ever since 2001 when they put down the Twin Towers, I've been beating them up."

Sunando Sen was not a Muslim, but as a brown-skinned foreigner living in the United States, he was targeted and killed in an act of hate which is the by-product of an ongoing campaign of bigotry and demonisation against Muslims living in America.

Muslim-Americans, as well as Hindus, Sikhs and others who purportedly "look Muslim" have been humiliated, assaulted and in many cases murdered by individuals often galvanised to violence by politicians and media figures who have enthusiastically engaged in public hatemongering against the Muslim community in the country.

Anti-Muslim violence increases

The 9/11 attacks precipitated a surge in hate crimes, but even as the events themselves recede further into history, the level of hatred and violence directed at Muslim communities is paradoxically increasing. Within the past month, in New York alone, police have suspected racial hatred as being the motive behind several crimes.

This includes a string of murders specifically targeting Middle Eastern storekeepers in Brooklyn, the last of whom, a 78-year old Iranian immigrant named Rahmatollah Vahidipour, was shot to death while closing his boutique and whose lifeless body was then dragged to a backroom and covered over with merchandise from his store.

Within the same week as Vahidipour's murder another Muslim man was viciously beaten by two men who preceded their attack by asking him whether he was "a Hindu or a Muslim", while another man was stabbed several times outside of a mosque in a random attack by an assailant who screamed "I'm going to kill you Muslim", while repeatedly plunging a knife into his victims' body.

Far from being aberrations, these incidents are in line with national statistics which show anti-Muslim violence in America nearing record highs, a trend which comes in tandem with highly public campaigns against mosque construction as well as fear-mongering by politicians and media figures regarding alleged plots by Muslim-Americans to override the constitution and impose Islamic law on the country.

The US election cycle also saw Muslims used as convenient targets for politicians seeking office, with one example being incumbent Illinois House of Representatives Republican Joe Walsh who told a cheering crowd at a campaign rally that "Muslims are here trying to kill Americans everyday", before making a baseless and highly incendiary claim that radical Islam had "infiltrated" the Chicago suburbs and that Muslims there were planning an attack that would "make 9/11 look like child's play".

While working the crowd into hysterics was a convenient campaign strategy for Walsh, just days later the Muslim community experienced the consequences of his rhetoric. A man opened fire on an Illinois mosque while it was packed with hundreds of congregants for Ramadan. The next day, another mosque was hit with an acid bomb thrown at a window while worshippers had gathered for night services.

Despite these attacks against Illinois Muslims in the wake of his statements, Walsh steadfastly refused to apologise for his rhetoric demonising the Muslim-Americans and instead doubled-down on his blanket accusations against them, a reflection of the mainstream acceptability of anti-Muslim rhetoric by political figures in the US today.

Indeed the use of Muslims as a punching bag by opportunistic politicians seeking a minority group to scapegoat has become a regular feature of American political life which shows no signs of abating, despite the "trickle-down" effect by which this bigotry is now manifesting itself in real violence against innocent Muslim-Americans on a regular basis.

Behind this hatemongering lies a deep cynicism, as leading anti-Muslim politicians such as Newt Gingrich who have warned of "stealth jihad" and other nefarious plots by Muslims in America were within recent years helping facilitate Sharia-compliant finance programmes in the country and who maintained notably cordial relations with prominent Muslim leaders.

Political hatemongering

With Muslim-bashing becoming politically fashionable in recent years, politicians such as Gingrich have markedly changed their tune and it has been to the detriment of Muslim-Americans, as well as to the general level of social cohesion and tolerance in the country.

In addition to political hatemongering, the past several years have seen a highly organised and well-funded group of anti-Muslim activists who have been sponsoring campaigns targeting Muslims across the country.

Leading figures in this movement such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer have led a crusade to vilify Muslims throughout the country and to exclude them from public life through campaigns of smears and hate-mongering which have cast Muslim-Americans as an insidious fifth column within the country.

Their views have gotten considerable popular attention, and thanks to a documented network of funders and media associates they have managed to bring their message to people across the United States.

In the past few months, a major controversy erupted when Geller's anti-Muslim organisation sponsored the placement of Islamophobic advertisements at major subway stations in New York as well as in other cities across the country.

Some advertisements depicted pictures of the 9/11 attacks with verses from the Quran superimposed, while others called Muslims "savages" and implored people to "fight Jihad". While the campaign has been challenged by many liberal commentators, including one infamous incident in which Egyptian-American activist Mona Eltahawy was arrested for attempting to cover a sign with pink spray paint, they continue to run across the country and to spread a message of indiscriminate, vitriolic hatred towards Muslim-Americans in a manner unlikely to be tolerated were it to pertain to any other minority group.

While correlation does not necessarily imply causation, the question must be asked - what effect do advertisements such as these have on the psyches' of people such as Erika Menendez? Was Sunando Sen, a law-abiding, hardworking immigrant who had given his life to achieving the American dream and who was pushed to his death by a woman who "hated Muslims" a direct victim of this campaign of bigotry? That he lost his life on the same subway system which for months has played host to hateful, incendiary advertisements such as Geller's is a tragic irony but is in many ways the natural result of a national culture of anti-Muslim bigotry that has become mainstream in both politics and popular culture.

The sad, inescapable truth is that Sen will likely not be the last victim of the accelerating phenomena of violence against Muslims in the United States - the only question today is how far into the darkness America must travel before it decides to take a stand against it.

The controversy around Zero Dark Thirty: As misleading as the film itself

Both treat torture at secret CIA prisons as if it were a thing of the past, masking the reality of an enduring practice.

The controversy surrounding Zero Dark Thirty has been as misguided as the film itself, which opened nationwide on Friday. Much of the debate has centred on whether Hurt Locker director Kathryn Bigelow's latest opus leaves viewers with the false impression that torture led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. That both the means employed and the ends achieved in that equation are illegal and repugnant seems all but forgotten. Both torture and extrajudicial executions are anathema to civilised society, irrespective of their possible efficacy or expediency. More importantly, both the film and the controversy it has ignited treat torture at secret CIA prisons as though it were a thing of the past, masking the reality of an enduring practice.

The first third of Zero Dark Thirty is unadulterated torture porn, a display of medieval cruelty at various CIA and affiliated prisons. Strappado, drowning, sexual abuse, beatings, stress positions, loud music, stuffing people into boxes, sleep deprivation, but also - and this is not acknowledged enough as torture - threats to send prisoners to countries where they would face further abuse (in the film, Israel). My clients at Guantánamo and Bagram survived such savagery at the hands of their American captors. I can attest that its traces on their bodies and minds are real and lasting. But the film cares not an ounce for those consequences, lingering instead on the torturers' feelings about their crimes.

The film alludes to one of President Obama's first acts in office: ordering the closure of CIA "detention facilities" and forbidding the agency from operating prisons again. An often-overlooked provision, however, exempts "short-term, transitory" facilities from the order. In a statement last month regarding CIA detention, Senator Dianne Feinstein lamented as "terrible mistakes" only "long-term, clandestine 'black sites'." The effect of these verbal gymnastics is to preserve the CIA's ability to hold prisoners directly, albeit short-term.

And while Obama limited interrogation techniques to those listed in the Army Field Manual, that document was modified in 2006 to permit stress positions, sleep deprivation, and isolation - methods amounting to torture that are depicted in Zero Dark Thirty. The notion that the CIA no longer tortures prisoners, then, can only result from real or feigned ignorance.

Equally intact, of course, is the US government's continuing reliance on proxy detention, where foreign regimes do the dirty work of imprisoning, interrogating, and often abusing prisoners without process, at the behest (and sometimes with the participation) of US agents.

To be sure, Zero Dark Thirty is misleading on its own terms. It begins with the claim that it is "based on firsthand accounts of actual events". In what is perhaps the film's only truly sophisticated, if unintended, insight, we see its heroine paradoxically overcoming subordination in a male-dominated profession while participating in the subjugation of Muslim prisoners, as she comes to fully embrace her sadistic role. Relying on a panoply of torture tricks reminiscent of your basic dictatorship (notwithstanding the obscene American conceit that ours is a more elevated, controlled form of torture), we watch as US agents extract information from a string of prisoners. It is this portrayal of torture bearing fruit that the Senate Intelligence Committee has condemned as "grossly inaccurate" based on its review of more than six million pages of classified intelligence records.

The final act of Zero Dark Thirty depicts the Abbottabad raid. Though it is the closest this film lover ever wants to come to a snuff movie, it does get one thing right: the raid was a "kill operation", an ordered execution, despite the administration's tepid protestations that US commandos were prepared to capture the unarmed bin Laden if only he had known to surrender in precisely the right way.

Zero Dark Thirty aspires to be a dispassionate exposition of the facts as they unfolded. But because their presentation is informed by and told from the perspective of the American operatives involved in the search for bin Laden, it is unsurprising that these filmmakers were "captured" by government officials with an agenda to justify their crimes. As such, the film cannot be neutral, no more than embedded war reporting can pass for truly independent journalism. In the end, Bigelow is an embedded filmmaker, and, from that position, her work cannot offer the critical, questioning perspective that defines art.

Unfortunately, the film's errors and biases have focused national attention on whether torture "worked" and if the film got that "right". That there has been no real accountability for past and ongoing crimes barely registers in the discussion. Far from highlighting that sad truth, Zero Dark Thirty lionizes those who ordered and implemented torture. In this respect, the filmmakers are complicit in reinforcing the impunity shielding the culprits.

Some would call that propaganda, and many of the film's admirers as well as its critics have fallen for it.

The whole purpose of this movie is when they announced they got OBL, a majority of teens were texting "who is he" and had no clue about what happened in in the last 10 or so years. This is a propaganda film to educate the young minds of lies of the past to stir up hate against others.

(11/29/12) -- CAIR is calling on all people of conscience to contact the SUBWAY restaurant chain to request that a formal apology be given to a Louisiana Muslim allegedly locked out of a sandwich shop in that state because of his faith. [SUBWAY, based in Milford, Conn., has more than 38,000 locations in 100 countries.]

A retired 63-year-old U.S. citizen of South Asian heritage who lives in New Orleans reported to CAIR that on November 21, 2012, he and his wife stopped at the SUBWAY restaurant in Shreveport, La. Before ordering, they went to the restrooms in the facility. The husband exited the restroom first and went outside the restaurant to wait for his wife in anticipation of re-entering to order their food.

While his wife was still inside the restaurant, the victim attempted to re-enter, but was blocked at the door by a female SUBWAY employee who allegedly asked him "Are you Muslim?" When the victim replied that he is indeed Muslim, the SUBWAY employee reportedly responded, "We can't serve you." The employee then went inside the restaurant and locked the door behind her. Fearing for his wife's safety and distraught at the violation of his civil rights, the man called 911.

When the Shreveport Police Department arrived, an officer went inside the SUBWAY restaurant and later came out to tell the victim that the manager was "scared" of him and that he "better leave."

[NOTE: The victim is 5'6" and weighs approximately 155 pounds. He wears an Islamic cap, called a "kufi," and a beard for religious reasons. His wife, a teacher, wears an Islamic headscarf, or "hijab."]

In a letter to SUBWAY President and CEO Fred DeLuca,CAIR National Legal Counsel Nadhira Al-Khalili wrote in part:

"Louisiana Revised Statutes 51:2247 states that it is a 'discriminatory practice for a person to deny an individual the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation, resort, or amusement, as defined in this Chapter, on the grounds of race, creed, color, religion, sex, age, disability, as defined in R.S. 51:2232(11), or national origin.' According to the law, a place of public accommodation 'means any place, store, or other establishment, either licensed or unlicensed, which supplies goods or services to the general public.'"

Al-Khalili's letter cited Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on account of religion in places of public accommodation and service. She also referred to the company's diversity policy that claims SUBWAY "does not tolerate discrimination of any kind on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, creed, religion, color or national origin."

CAIR requested that SUBWAY (1) investigate this troubling incident, (2) offer a formal written apology to the victim and his wife, (3) institute policy changes that will ensure that this type of incident does not occur in the future, (4) offer compensation to the victim and his wife for the humiliation and emotional distress caused by the SUBWAY employee and the police, and (5) participate in a corporate religious sensitivity program for franchise managers.

A copy of the letter was sent to Chief Willie L. Shaw, Jr. of the Shreveport Police Department and to the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division.

Immediate action requested: (As always, be polite and respectful.)

Contact SUBWAY to request that they (1) investigate this troubling incident, (2) offer a formal written apology to the victim and his wife, (3) institute policy changes that will ensure that this type of incident does not occur in the future, (4) offer compensation to the victim and his wife for the humiliation and emotional distress caused by the SUBWAY employee and the police, and (5) participate in a corporate religious sensitivity program for franchise managers.

By Sam Wood - December 19, 2012Two New Jersey white supremacists who allegedly attacked several men of Egyptian descent on New Years Eve - and then boasted about the assault on a social media website - were charged this morning with the commission of hate crimes, federal prosecutors said.

Christopher Ising, 31, and Michal Gunar, 27, purportedly are members of two virulently racist neo-Nazi groups. Federal authorities said Ising, of East Brunswick, belonged to the "Atlantic City Skins;" Gunar, of Cranbury, is a member of the "Aryan Terror Brigade," according to the indictment.

On New Years Eve 2011, Ising threw a party at his home where he discussed plans to assault non-Caucasians at random with Gunar and others, the indictment said. Pumped up on alcohol and white supremacist music, Ising, Gunar and six to eight party goers left Ising's home to "hunt down some sand niggers," Gunar later wrote.

At a nearby Sayreville apartment complex, the skinheads found their prey in a parking lot. Ising, carrying brass knuckles, and Gunar, brandishing a knife, set upon a man identified in the indictment as M.H. When a friend of the victim, R.M., rushed to his aid, the skinheads attacked him while shouting anti-Arab slurs, according to the indictment. The indictment was unclear about the role of the third man.

Following the beatings, Ising and Gunar fled to Ising's home. Later, Gunar posted a picture of a pair of pants soiled with blood. About a week later, Gunar trumpeted his involvement with the beating on the same website, according to the indictment.

" ...We went to hunt down some sand niggers, it was me and my other bro on like 6 or eight and we whooped them..." Gunar allegedly wrote.

If convicted on the hate crime charges, both Ising and Gunar face up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000

(Ottawa, Canada) - A national Muslim civil liberties organization strongly condemns the recent vandalism of a mosque in Guelph, Ontario and is calling on authorities to launch a hate crime investigation.

The Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CAN) is further calling on public officials to denounce the March 6th graffiti vandalism of the Muslim Society of Guelph's Islamic Centre. Hateful symbols and slurs were spray-painted on the mosque building by an unknown perpetrator.

Local police are investigating the vandalism. Mosque officials say this is the third incident of vandalism directed against their mosque since last summer.

"Acts of vandalism that target places of worship are extremely hurtful and intimidating to local citizens. These incidents are not reflective of the values we all cherish as Canadians. We urge local leaders in Guelph and elected officials at all levels to join us in condemning this hateful incident," says Amira Elghawaby, CAIR-CAN Human Rights Coordinator.

“We urge local police to investigate this incident as a potential hate crime,” adds Ms. Elghawaby. “We ask community members to remain vigilant and to immediately document and report suspicious behaviour to law enforcement agencies, as well as to CAIR-CAN. We need to document these types of incidents so that together, communities have a clear record of the issues they need to address.”

A 39-year-old Muslim cab driver who served in the Iraq war says that an executive from an aviation company accused him of being a jihadist and broke his jaw in what activists are calling a hate crime.

Mohamed A. Salim told The Washington Post that Emerald Aviation President Ed Dahlberg attacked him after he picked him up at Country Club of Fairfax in Northern Virginia at around 2 a.m. on Friday. Dahlberg had been drinking and was told that he would have to finish his open beer before getting into the cab.

Salim recorded audio of the encounter on his cell phone.
Dahlberg can be heard asking Salim, who emigrated from Somalia, to define “jihad” and then lumping him in with “radical f*cking Muslims blowing people up all over the world.”

“Denounce those motherf*ckers now!” Dahlberg demands. “If you’re a f*cking Muslim flying jets into the fucking World Trade Center then f*ck you. I will slice your f*cking throat right now.”

After Salim threatens to call 911, Dahlberg can be seen grabbing for the cell phone.

Salim said that Dahlberg left the cab, but then returned and broke his jaw before running into the woods.

Dahlberg was charged with misdemeanor assault and police are determining if charges should be elevated to a felony hate crime. The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on Monday said that medical records and the 11-minute cell phone recording were being used as evidence in the case.

In a statement, Dahlberg’s attorney, Demetry Pikrallidas, admitted that his client “became rather emotional as the discussion turned to jihad and 9/11, and especially heated on the subject of jihadists who want to harm America.”

Pikrallidas insisted that Dahlberg did not assault Salim.

The website for Dahlberg’s company, Emerald Aviation, was offline for four days of “scheduled maintenance” as of Wednesday afternoon. A cached copy of the website listed him as the president and said he had “20 years experience in the field of business and commercial aviation” and was known for “transparent business transactions and always effectively representing the best interests of his clients.”

Salim is a naturalized U.S. citizen and is an Army Reserve sergeant who has worked in intelligence and as a linguist. He served in Iraq and at the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

“I sacrificed for this country,” Salim told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday. “And I myself was fighting the terrorists and I’m against acts of violence. I’m not a terrorist. I’m not a jihadist. I’m American like you.”

“Whether he’s guilty of assault or not is up to a jury to decide, but the video makes it clear that the guy is a bigoted asshole,” Jalopnik’s Patrick George observed on Wednesday. “There’s no excuse for treating someone else this way.”

Reader Comments:

Aaron J Berg - Mr. Dahlberg is white from my understanding and his victim Mr. Salim is black ie. non-white. This to me is typical racism white supremacy and is perhaps why that white male only was charged with a misdemeanor. If it was a black person or non-white person assaulting a white person, in my opinion they would have been charged with a felony and even perhaps attempted murder.

jennyopines - “If you’re a f*cking Muslim flying jets into the fucking World Trade Center then f*ck you. I will slice your fucking throat right now.”.....it's what Dahlberg thinks.

ProChoiceGrandma - Hrumph! Dahlberg's attorney described Dahlberg as a “hardworking family man and a church-going person”, but that description should also include he is an avid Faux Noise viewer and brainwashed by the ilk of Hannity et al. I'd like to know what church Dahlberg attends.

Homer - Well Fox News should be very proud of themselves and their anti-Muslim propaganda because it looks like people are responding to it.Guest -Nothing is worse than Americans that carry hate towards Muslims just because of the war on terror. 911 was an inside job! Stop being such dumbf*cks. This jackass should get 5+ years lockdown.dragontech64 -People like Dahlberg are the real terrorists. HE needs a few years behind bars for his efforts.

The Electronic Intifada reported that since the incident became public last month, the student, Najib Hamideh, says he has faced violent threats written on his reserved seat in the campus library, and someone flattened one of the tires of his car with a sharpened key. The Claremont McKenna College administration has not yet taken administrative action against the professor.

Rather than investigating the professor’s behavior, Claremont McKenna college responded to the incident by investigatingStudents for Justice in Palestine for alleged violations of campus rules. The unwarranted investigation further chills student speech in favor of Palestinian human rights. The letter emphasizes Claremont Colleges’ obligation to protect student speech rights, and protect all students from racist speech, including Arab, Muslim and Palestinian students.

Najib Hamideh is a student at Pitzer College, which is part of the Claremont College consortium, and a member of Students for Justice in Palestine. Pitzer’s Faculty Executive Committee, concerned with how the Pitzer administration had at first dealt with the situation, reasserted “that the right for peaceful demonstrations is an integral piece of an open, intellectually vigorous college community” and called for “protection from verbal assault and harassment.” Pitzer’s administration has since come forward and stated that SJP’s action was not in violation of campus demonstration policy, and reiterated that faculty conduct at Claremont McKenna College is not under Pitzer’s purview.“Protecting student speech rights”

The full letter by the rights groups addresses the presidents, deans of faculty and faculty chairpersons at all five Claremont Colleges, and provides essential background on the expanding climate of racism and Islamophobia on college campuses. It also analyzes the incident in the context of current acts of repression against Palestine solidarity activists and activism on campuses by Israel-aligned groups, while highlighting the duty of academic institutions to protect free speech and academic freedom.

The First Amendment and cherished values of higher education cannot allow colleges to succumb to pressure to censor a particular viewpoint on a question of critical international importance. The undersigned organizations are committed to ensuring equal, unobstructed access to viewpoints supporting Palestinian rights. We will continue to monitor colleges across the country that hesitate to protect Arab, Muslim, or pro-Palestinian students.

We hope that you will consider swift and appropriate remedies to protect student speech rights, and to address the harms to the educational environment resulting from racial bias. We would be very happy to engage in further conversation about how the Presidents of the Claremont Colleges can support robust participation in campus life for all students.

Liz Jackson of the Center for Constitutional Rights told The Electronic Intifada: “We received acknowledgement from both Pitzer and Claremont McKenna that they are taking the issue seriously.”“No violation of demonstration policy”

The press office at Claremont McKenna College sent The Electronic Intifada this official response to CCR’s letter by email on 2 April:

Claremont McKenna College is committed to providing an inclusive community that supports free speech and the sharing of diverse and controversial viewpoints while also providing an environment in which all members of our community feel welcome and safe. The College took the concerns about the professor’s alleged conduct seriously, and acted immediately to conduct a fair and neutral review into the incident.

Many of the factual assertions that have been published about this incident are in dispute, and it is therefore important to allow for a fair and neutral process that respects the rights of both parties to be completed. The College is committed to taking any disciplinary or other remedial measures that may be appropriate based on the findings of its review and in accordance with the College’s mission and values.

Pitzer College’s administration sent The Electronic Intifada their official statement as well, on 3 April:

As part of international Israeli Apartheid Week, a 5-college student organization Students for Justice in Palestine planned a street theater event at Claremont McKenna College on Monday, March 4.

Pitzer College determined after its own thorough investigation that the students had permission for the March 4th event and did not find any violation of the demonstration policy. The Claremont McKenna College (CMC) faculty member’s behavior is currently being reviewed by the Dean of Faculty at CMC. Pitzer College, which has no purview over faculty conduct at other Claremont Colleges, will keep our community informed of further developments in the continuing process as appropriate.

Pitzer’s Office of Student Affairs (OSA) is mindful of the impact this event has had on Pitzer students and others in our campus community, and continues to provide support to all of our students. OSA plans to partner with interested faculty and students to discuss and process these events and to educate one another about the related political and cultural issues.

The Electronic Intifada will continue to provide updates on this story as they develop.

Jack Dresser, Ph.D. (not verified) -
As a graduate of Pomona College and supporter of the "Oxford" model of scholarship-intensive, clustered colleges sharing common resources but unfortunately at this time the curse of a common reputation, I find this an embarrassment and a sad testimony to the power of racism over education and intellect (assuming the Israeli professor has both). His word choice closely resembles those of Israel Prime Minister and former Lehi terrorist leader Yitzhak Shamir in 1988, quoted in the NYT: “(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” Another, much more enlightened Israeli professor, Nurit Peled-Elhanon, has published her study of the flagrant racism in Israeli textbooks, a school system which the offending academic has apparently failed to outgrow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...).

A religious battle over food is erupting at the Palm Beach County Jail after kosher meals were taken away from Muslim inmates and replaced with a vegan meal.

Imam Jaabir Muhammad, the jail chaplain, said he is concerned Muslim inmates are not being treated fairly and not given a tray catered with the Islamic faith in mind.

"They made all of them vegans, vegetarians against their will," said Muhammad.

Muhammad claims inmates were informed on July 15th they would no longer receive kosher or halal meals although Jewish inmates would continue to receive kosher meals.

"If you're just feeding them vegetables, you're not going to have the nutritional value to be able to survive and abstain the rigors of affairs," said Muhammad.

Muslims can eat meat, it just must be prepared or butchered in a special way. Followers of Islam prefer "halal" meat but can eat kosher meals as an alternative.

"If someone breaks a law, punish them for breaking the law. But don't punish them for being human," said Muhammad.

The Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office released this statement:

"The Sheriff's Office is in complete compliance with all Jail Accreditation standards prescribed by, the American Correctional Association, the Florida Correctional Accreditation Commission, and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, concerning meals given to all inmates. Inmates requiring specialty meals are given meals as it relates to each specific religion, and those meals meet the standards for each specific religion. The Sheriff's Office is in contact with the leadership of the Muslims community, and will address any of their concerns as it relates to the standards the jail adheres to, but we will not deviate from those standards."

A jail spokesperson later clarified that the kosher meals were taken away from the Muslim inmates to cut costs.

When asked about why the Jewish inmates continued to receive kosher meals, a spokesperson sent this statement:

"I understand the Muslim religion does not require their meals to be kosher and the Jewish religion does. We provide kosher meals to inmates practicing the Jewish faith. We provide an alternative religious diet to Muslims that follow the Halal dietary requirements. Meals whether they are kosher or alternative religious diet(s), meet ALL the daily nutritional recommendations required."

Jaabir Muhammad said he is disappointed by the change and calls the move unfair.

"It sends to me that there's favoritism, discrimination and that they're discriminating against the Muslims in favor of other religious beliefs," said Muhammad.

The posters lined the street near the El Farouq Mosque on Sauer Conrad Drive at Westview.

In black letters, the signs read, "No Muslim parking in the Westview Shopping Center. Your car will be towed."

Many Muslims heading to worship services were offended.

"I feel sorry for the person who wrote it," said Ahmed Hassan. "This is what comes to mind because obviously he has a lot of hate."

"I'm very shocked because we do live in a society that's supposed to be very accepting and this is what we all preach," said Yara Aboshady. "That we all have the freedom of religion."

The mosque sits across the street from the shopping center. Store employees did not want to go on camera, but admit they get angry when mosque members park in their lot, taking up spots meant for customers.

With the Muslim month-long fast for the holy month of Ramadan ending, and a crowd expected at the mosque, the signs anonymously appeared. No shopping center employees would take credit. One worker said the shopping center owner, Steve Kwon, posted the signs.

So Local 2 took the mosque members' concerns to Kwon.

"I did not put up the signs," said Kwon.

Aboshady wondered about the sign writer's true motive.

"It could be no parking for the sake of patrons that come in," Aboshady said. "Or it really could be a prejudice and just a mean thing to say."

She and others still find the signs insensitive and offensive.

"It's really offensive and it's hateful," said Hassan.

The owner says they will be calling a tow company to try to get all of the cars that shouldn't be parked here out. And he says he'll be checking the property to make there are no more of the offending parking signs.

WASHINGTON -- A proposed amendment to Oklahoma's state constitution that would have prevented state courts from considering Sharia and international law was struck down by a federal judge on Thursday.

Chief District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of the Western District of Oklahoma, who issued a temporary restraining order preventing the law from taking effect after it passed in 2010, ruled Thursday that the amendment’s references to Sharia, or Islamic law, violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. While Oklahoma officials argued the amendment could be enacted if the reference to Sharia was removed, Miles-LaGrange ruled that wasn't possible.

"Having reviewed the numerous statements by the legislators who authored the amendment, it is abundantly clear that the primary purpose of the amendment was to specifically target and outlaw Sharia law and to act as a preemptive strike against Sharia law to protect Oklahoma from a perceived 'threat' of Sharia law being utilized in Oklahoma courts," she ruled.

Miles-LaGrange also found that Oklahoma voters wouldn't have passed the constitutional amendment without the Sharia language, ruling that the "public debate, public discussions, articles, radio ads and robocalls regarding SQ 755 all primarily, and overwhelmingly, focused on the Sharia law provisions of the amendment" and that given that context, any reasonable voter would have thought the amendment was a referendum on Sharia.

It was an "undisputed fact" that "the concern that it seeks to address has yet to occur," said Miles-LaGrange.

"While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out, the Court finds that the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual’s constitutional rights," she ruled.

The lawsuit against the constitutional amendment was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on behalf of the executive director of CAIR's Oklahoma chapter, Muneer Awad.

"Throughout the case, the state couldn't present even a shred of evidence to justify this discriminatory, unnecessary measure," Daniel Mach, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said in a statement.

"This law unfairly singled out one faith and one faith only," said Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the ACLU of Oklahoma. "This amendment was nothing more than a solution in search of a problem. We're thrilled that it has been struck down."